Preterism and the Necessity of Honoring the Timing Statements of Christ’s Return

I know this was directed to HankD but I will answer. The verses are to be taken literally. They are future events, will happen on the day of the Lord, that is why they are not recorded in history. Quite simple really.

 

Seriously... do you even know the historical context of Isaiah???

I have a feeling the only reason you are saying that is b/c it obviously was not fulfilled literally. But the fall of Babylon was an earthshaking moment in the history of the nations. So figurative (apocalyptic) language was used for a normal even in history... imagine that.

 

I really don't have a lot of time to play in the sandbox today but a few comments...

From a normal reading of the Gospel accounts one could infer that the destruction of the temple and the second coming of Christ are not same thing. There is about 2000 years of Christian belief on that that would agree with me on this.

The New testament clearly states that when Jesus returns he will lead the army made up of his holy ones. I don't understand why you would try to argue against this, it is that plainly taught in the Holy Bible.

Again, it is true that God did in the past use heathen armies but the Bible clearly states that when Jesus returns in judgement that that army will be from heaven.

The reason I disagree with your take on the time statements is because I hold a high view of the Scriptures. There are a lot of details regarding the second coming that didn't happen in AD 70 so that tells me that the second coming didn't happen in AD 70.

 

That seems very unlikely in light of v. 13

"Behold, I am stirring up the Medes against them, who have no regard for silver and do not delight in gold."

I'm sure you know, the Medes & Persians ended the Babylonian empire. This was a prophecy of things soon to come.

 

Yes it did have an immediate fulfilment but as many of us believe there are often both an immediate and far reaching fulfilment of prophecy.
e.g. I called my Son out of Egypt.

The Medes (Heb - Madai) were descendants of Japhet.
A culture and people can continue on after their nation and/or empire is defeated. e.g. the Romans became the Italians.

Today we would call the Medes Iranians.

Babylon of Isaiah 13 would be identified with Mystery Babylon of the Revelation.


HankD

 

Or John is playing off of the concept of Babylon since the empire had long been defeated. I can't believe I used to believe this stuff.

But the one that gets me most is the inconsistencies of verses having dual fulfillments when dispo's in the same breath talk about single meaning and stable meaning.

Isa. 13 very clearly pictures the fall of the Babylonian empire by the Medes. Figural, apocalyptic language was used to describe said fall. And that is a plain reading of the text.

 

ISA 13 was already fulfilled

 

Please document and give historical evidence of this:

For the stars of heaven and the constellations thereof shall not give their light: the sun shall be darkened in his going forth, and the moon shall not cause her light to shine. (Isaiah 13:10)

Therefore I will shake the heavens, and the earth shall remove out of her place, in the wrath of the LORD of hosts, and in the day of his fierce anger. (Isaiah 13:13)

When and where did this happen. Documentation is required, not just people's fantasies.

 

Doesn't anyone want to discuss this wonderful post written by Bro. Jeff???

Very good job!! :thumbsup::thumbsup::thumbsup::thumbsup:

 

UHHHH, how 'bout while Jesus was dying on the cross??

 

Look everyone, we each have a methodology to interpret prophecy.

From Isaiah 13 I fully expect that Iran will attack Israel at the foreordained time.

I became weary of the verbal dunnybrook the last time we did this.

Scan the BB if you wish to see all of my answers to preterists. I sense that this is going down a path I don't want to go over again.

HankD

 

You might stretch verse 10 to coincide with the death of Christ; a partial fulfillment.
But verse 13?

Therefore I will shake the heavens, and the earth shall remove out of her place, in the wrath of the LORD of hosts, and in the day of his fierce anger. (Isaiah 13:13)

Were the heaven shaken? Was the earth removed out of her place? I don't think so.

 

With John 1:18 you neglected John 1:14:

And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth. (John 1:14)
According to John 1:1 the Word is God. I am not sure I am following you. We don't have to prove the deity of Christ, and that he walked and talked on the earth 2,000 years ago, do we? I assume you believe that--an historical Christ who was deity?

As John says he saw God (full of grace and truth), so did the disciples see him ascend into heaven, and so will every eye see him when he comes again. Also we will see him when he comes for us, for we shall see him, and we shall be like him.

Beloved, now are we the sons of God, and it doth not yet appear what we shall be: but we know that, when he shall appear, we shall be like him; for we shall see him as he is. (1 John 3:2)

 

Documentation??? How about when Babylon was defeated by the Medes (cf. 13:17)? The figural language was used because when Babylon fell it was an earth shattering event. You have to be able to allow apocalyptic language to include real world historical events such as clearly referred to in Isa. 13.

 

If the passage was confined from verses 1 to 5 then you might have a case. But we are not dealing with first five verses which are directed at Babylon.
This paragraph starts at verse 6:

Howl ye; for the day of the LORD is at hand; it shall come as a destruction from the Almighty. (Isaiah 13:6)
--This is no description of Babylon. It is a description of "The Day of the Lord," which all Jews knew to be well into the future, a day when the judgement of God would come, and then Messiah would come at that time as well. Both events were connected in the Jewish mind. And both events are still connected. Nothing has changed.
The Messiah is still to come.
Judgment is still to come.
That description is still future.
It does not deal with Babylon.

 

One cannot so handily dismiss the triune Godhead.

8 Philip saith unto him, Lord, shew us the Father, and it sufficeth us.
9 Jesus saith unto him, Have I been so long time with you, and yet hast thou not known me, Philip? he that hath seen me hath seen the Father; and how sayest thou then, Shew us the Father?
10 Believest thou not that I am in the Father, and the Father in me? the words that I speak unto you I speak not of myself: but the Father that dwelleth in me, he doeth the works.
11 Believe me that I am in the Father, and the Father in me: or else believe me for the very works' sake. (John 14:8-11)

When they saw Christ they saw the Father.
Christ revealed the Father.
The Father was revealed through Christ.
God was manifest in the flesh through Christ.

 

DHK,
Because you have not learned how to deal with the language God uses here to describe the fall of Babylon.....does not mean others do not see it....greektim,and Logos have answered this correctly...it also explains the languge of Mt 24...which you also mangle.

To see it clearly look at how God uses the same or similar language elsewhere.....